Crimewatch Technologies is the "brainchild" of a convicted drug offender, which sounds about right. There is not much "technology" involved. It is a national website that police agencies pay (with taxpayer dollars) to be a part of. Prior to its inception, police spokespersons would communicate one-on-one with the news media or hold press conferences to report important information. Reporters, in turn, could ask questions, get clarifications, vet the information they receive, consult or confer with other sources, and CHOOSE what stories or info to run and what not to. Crimewatch claims it "simplifies policing for the 21st Century", "enhances community safety" and "increases transparency". It, not only, does NONE of those things...it does the exact opposite:
It simplifies policing for cops in that chiefs can eliminate media relations jobs/roles from their ranks by feeding everything they WANT to feed to Crimewatch - while withholding important information from the public at their whim, avoiding personal interviews with the press, (and probing questions), and taking over the role of news editor when most cops have little more than a high school diploma (or equivalent) and Act 120 training. Crimewatch deletes ANY transparency for police chiefs, as most blurbs don't name the officer who fed the report -- many of which are false, or contain extraneous and impertinent information that would, ottherwise, be protected under the Criminal History Records Imformation Act or federal law.
Furthermore, Crimewatch does NOTHING to "enhance community safety", as it publishes trivial information about, otherwise, ordinary citizens who might have had a brief brush with the law. The damage done by Crimewatch (while it hides behind an "innocent until proven guilty" disclaimer) is a life-altering event with negative consequences that will far outlast any "not guilty" verdict, expungement, or "Clean Slate" legislation the Governor might sign into law. Crimewatch serves no legitimate public policy, violates Pa's Constitutional right to reputation, and lines the pockets of the owner, investors and corrupt police chiefs who sign up for the service (paid for by their taxpayer funded budget.
The police chiefs who think this is a good idea that "benefits" the public are the same PA police chiefs who favor encrypting police radio communications, even though there are ample studies that encryption is responsible for far more loss of life than it has ever "saved an officer from being ambushed by somebody who heard their location on a scanner". Really? If that EVER happens, feed it to Crimewatch so we can ALL read that fake news. Until then, it's time to ambush Crimewatch's unethical business model with a class-action law suit.
Crimewatch Technologies Reviews
Crimewatch Technologies is the "brainchild" of a convicted drug offender, which sounds about right. There is not much "technology" involved. It is a national website that police agencies pay (with taxpayer dollars) to be a part of. Prior to its inception, police spokespersons would communicate one-on-one with the news media or hold press conferences to report important information. Reporters, in turn, could ask questions, get clarifications, vet the information they receive, consult or confer with other sources, and CHOOSE what stories or info to run and what not to. Crimewatch claims it "simplifies policing for the 21st Century", "enhances community safety" and "increases transparency". It, not only, does NONE of those things...it does the exact opposite:
It simplifies policing for cops in that chiefs can eliminate media relations jobs/roles from their ranks by feeding everything they WANT to feed to Crimewatch - while withholding important information from the public at their whim, avoiding personal interviews with the press, (and probing questions), and taking over the role of news editor when most cops have little more than a high school diploma (or equivalent) and Act 120 training. Crimewatch deletes ANY transparency for police chiefs, as most blurbs don't name the officer who fed the report -- many of which are false, or contain extraneous and impertinent information that would, ottherwise, be protected under the Criminal History Records Imformation Act or federal law.
Furthermore, Crimewatch does NOTHING to "enhance community safety", as it publishes trivial information about, otherwise, ordinary citizens who might have had a brief brush with the law. The damage done by Crimewatch (while it hides behind an "innocent until proven guilty" disclaimer) is a life-altering event with negative consequences that will far outlast any "not guilty" verdict, expungement, or "Clean Slate" legislation the Governor might sign into law. Crimewatch serves no legitimate public policy, violates Pa's Constitutional right to reputation, and lines the pockets of the owner, investors and corrupt police chiefs who sign up for the service (paid for by their taxpayer funded budget.
The police chiefs who think this is a good idea that "benefits" the public are the same PA police chiefs who favor encrypting police radio communications, even though there are ample studies that encryption is responsible for far more loss of life than it has ever "saved an officer from being ambushed by somebody who heard their location on a scanner". Really? If that EVER happens, feed it to Crimewatch so we can ALL read that fake news. Until then, it's time to ambush Crimewatch's unethical business model with a class-action law suit.